1. Rural Households Infrastructure Grant
Presentation to the Standing Committee on Appropriations
Cllr Chris Neethling, MTS WG Chairperson
Mr Mthobeli Kolisa, Executive Director: MIS
17 August 2012

2. CONTEXT (ROLE DEFINITION)LG
156. Powers and functions of municipalities.
(1) A municipality has executive authority in respect of, and has the right to administer-
(a) the local government matters listed in Part B of Schedule 4 and Part B of the Constitution
Water and sanitation services limited to potable water supply systems and domestic waste-water and sewage disposal
Policy Development
Set norms and standards
Support to local government etc.
National

3. Supporting LG
SALGA will be the first to admit that there are challenges in some municipalities in respect of delivery
We did not meet the original target of providing sanitation services because of:
Financial Resources constraints
Institutional capacity constraints
But also because the target was poorly conceptualised (did not recognise that in some areas sanitation will have to be linked with provision of houses and/ or formalisation of informal settlements; hence its revision to align with housing targets

4. Supporting LG
A decentralised form of government provides an opportunity to enhance and deepen our democracy - sphere of government closest to communities be responsible for built environment services that impact directly on communities and households
The ultimate objective of supporting local government should remain that of building and strengthening a decentralised form of government – society should not loose faith in a decentralised system of government and in the role of sub-national spheres of government.
Dialectical relationship between capacity and responsibility; both work to condition and define the other - absence of responsibility diminishes the force to build capacity and vice versa
Support provided by National and Provincial Governments to LG should not take away responsibility for service delivery from the municipalities

5. COMPARISON MIG AND RHIP (spot the difference)
ITEMS
MIG
RHIP
Strategic Goal
Subside the capital costs of providing basic services to poor households – priority must be given to meeting basic infrastructure needs to the poor through the provision of appropriate municipal bulk, connector and internal infrastructure for key services
To eliminate backlogs in water and sanitation in rural households
Grant purpose
To provide capital finance for basic municipal infrastructure backlogs for poor households, micro enterprises and social institutions servicing the poor communities
To provide capital funding for the for the eradication of rural water and sanitation backlogs and is targeted at existing households where bulk –dependent services are not viable
Outputs
Number of additional poor households receiving basic water and sanitation services
Number of work created opportunities created using EPWP guidelines
Number of rural households provided with access to on site sanitation and non bulk dependent water facilities
Number of jobs created in accordance to EPWP guidelines

6. RHIP CONCEPTUALISATION
No clear problem statement that informed the conceptualization of the grant
No clear policy imperatives underpinning the creation of RHIP as a Schedule 7 grant as opposed to e.g. schedule 6
Not necessarily because of capacity because NG uses service providers
Not building local capacity but reallocating responsibility from local to national

7. MUNICIPAL EXPERIENCES WITH RHIP
Common cause that the RHIP expenditure performance was poor
Despite some good cases, the were some qualitative performance issues as well:
No effective mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the project implementation agreements
Ready made solution (appointment of Project Implementation Agency) in some instances such do not have sanitation experiences
In some cases PIA appoints contractor outside of a municipal spaces including buying of material (leading to community unhappiness and public protests
Health and hygiene not given enough attention – more attention is given to the top structure numbers
Ground Water Protocol seems not be observed
No alignment between MIG and RHIP – use of local capacity and processes

8. Recommendations
RHIP be integrated into MIG - the grants purpose and intention are the same
Each municipality assisted to set achievable rural water and sanitation targets and be held accountable
Finalize the Sanitation Policy – it will help with the following
Role clarification in the sanitation value chain
Funding mechanism(s) and approaches
Long term sustainability of the sanitation value chain

9. Thank you